The OECD has just released a global analysis of deliberation called Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions – Catching the Deliberative Wave
In an analysis of 282 deliberative projects documented from around the globe, Australia and Germany both had 48 projects, the most of any of the countries. The study includes projects from 1986 through to the current day and shows a first wave of interest between 1996 and 2000 that includes a large number of Planning Cells in Germany and Consensus Conferences in Denmark and then a second wave of many more processes with a trend towards Citizens’ Juries post 2011, which is now the most common process.
MosaicLab along with many other deliberative practitioners around the world contributed to this significant piece of work by providing our list of over 25 deliberations that we have facilitated in Australia. Thirteen of these deliberations were included in this OECD database.
In looking across global practice, this OECD report brings together key information about the principles and practices of deliberation that will be useful to any organisation thinking of embarking on deliberation and key ideas for how deliberation can be further embedded in our democratic systems.
SIX Interesting CONCEPTS (QUOTES) FROM THE REPORT
1. The report provides a good definition of deliberation
‘A randomly selected group of people who are broadly representative of a community spending significant time learning and collaborating through facilitated deliberation to form collective recommendations for policy matters’.
The report goes on to state that public deliberation is different to individual deliberation as it emphasises the need to find common ground (come to judgement, usually in the form of a set of recommendations).
2. The report provides a simple table showing the difference between deliberative democracy and participatory democracy (more standard engagement)
Number of Participants Type of Participation Participation Selection Method
Deliberative Relatively small but Participants are well-informed A civic lottery that combines random Democracy representative (to enable and consider different selection with stratification to ensure
deep deliberation) perspectives and arrive at it is representative of the demographics
public judgement (not of the public - not vulnerable to being
individual opinion) - a collective stacked by powerful interest groups
and considered view
Participatory Large numbers of people - More participation from Self-selected participation to enable as
Democracy aim is breadth of people everyone who chooses to be many people as possible to participate
involved - encouragement of a
diversity of opportunities
for engagement
3. It’s mostly but not all about citizens juries
While citizens juries are the most common form of deliberative practice at the moment, it is not the only method. This report outlines twelve different models or techniques of deliberation including Citizens’ Councils, Citizens Dialogues, Deliberative Polls etc.
4. Understanding what creates a successful deliberation is key
The report draws on the work of Natachi and outlines four evaluation principles: (1) design integrity, (2) sound deliberation, (3) influential recommendations and actions and (4) impact on the wider public.
5. Random selection delivers a better mix of participants than any other recruitment method
Random stratified selection seeks to overcome the shortcomings and distortions created by open participation (only hearing from people with vested interests). It is based on every person having an equal chance to be involved (invitations to random households) and that the final group is a microcosm of society (stratified to meet the demographics of the area). The report suggests that it is not a statistically perfect method but delivers a more mixed and diverse sample than any other recruitment process.
6. Decision makers need to be committed
The reports states that evidence suggests that the commitment of decision makers is a key factor for why people say yes to being a panel or jury and why drop-out rates are low. Having strong political commitment is important for giving the process credibility.
The report provides eight proposals for further action
These include:
1. Always follow the good practice principles for deliberation (the report lists 11 principles).
2. Use deliberation (deep engagement) with other methods to encourage the breadth of input (wider engagement).
3. Provide a lot of information to the public about every deliberation – the purpose, design, how people were recruited, list of experts etc.
4. Provide a lot more information about how the findings were implemented – demonstrating that when people participate, their proposals are taken seriously, and it is worth their time to take part in engagement programs.
5. Allow citizens to initiate deliberation on topics they consider important.
6. Find ways to make deliberation easier and less costly.
7. Provide paid leave for people to participate.
8. Increase the capacity of their governments to commission and deliver deliberative processes.
This contemporary piece of research into what is a burgeoning field of practice is a welcome gift to us as practitioners. Congratulations to the OECD and the team for taking the time to collate and review so many activities from across the globe.
ENJOYED THIS POST?
Stay in the know! Get new posts, actionable ideas and fabulous free resources delivered to your inbox - subscribe to our monthly e-newsletter 'the Discussion'.